6.5-7.0 is not that fast, it's comparable to other cars in the same class. A car needs to be quick enough to move away from oncoming cars or merging and 8.x -60mph is borderline. My current 4-banger 2000 altima is almost dangerous on the highway with my 2 kids, wife, and all of our suitcases in it, and it is as fast as the new 500. I would have a hard time spending $25K on a car that is underpowered.

It's not like you would be racing with the kids in the car anyway. And you don't have to use all of the power the car has, but it's nice for it to be there if you do need it.

 

The Altima's base engine is 2.5 liters, 4 cylinders, 175 hp.

The Camry's base engine is 2.4-liters, 4 cylinders, 160 hp.

The Accord's base engine is 2.4 liters, 4 cylinders, 160 hp.

The Five Hundred's base engine is 3.0 liters, 6 cylinders, 205 hp.

As I indicated in my previous post, the 3.5L Duratec should soon be providing the new Ford Five Hundred with an engine upgrade option that will be on par (horsepower-wise) with the upgraded/optional versions of the vehicles that you appear to be using as a comparison.

 

I haven't gotten one yet but I plan to soon. Yeah, a bit gutless, but I don't really care, it's the car I'll be traveling in, not racing in I need something comfortable for long trips with lots of space for gear. Trunk space is nothing short of amazing, 15 dead hooker rating and that's whole bodies, probably 20 if their dismembered. Seriously though, I'm hoping the 3.5 comes out for 06 it would be nice to have a bit more power though.

 

must be a new SAE rating system "hooker rating"

 

here is a comparison of equally priced and featured cars

Ford 500 SEL $27,795, 203hp

Niassan Altaima 3.5 SE $27,630, 250hp

Honda Accord EX $27365, 240hp

Buick Lacrosse CXS $28,995, 240hp

Chevrolet Impala SS $29,215, 240hp

Pontiac Grand Prix GTP $27,390 , 260hp

is the 500 under powered compaired to what you can get else where for the same money YES! the other manufactures at least offer a more pwoerful engine for the same money if it is wanted, to bad ford does not...at least not yet

 

I feel anything under 8 seconds is more than adequate. Our Aurora is a 7-7.5 second 0-60 car, and it has way more power than I need. It is fun to drive, but overkill as far as needed power. My Ranger 4.0 4x4 is in the 8.5-9 second range, and is just about right. Now the Taurus's with the Vulcan 3.0, or the Ranger with the same motor, are on the borderline between adequate and weak. Until the last 5 years, 8 seconds was downright quick for a family sedan. Taurus SHO's were considered fast, and they ran in the 6's. Mustang GT's were right around the 6 second range as well. I agree that the 500 needs a better optional engine, but as has been discussed here on FTE, it's not common for an all new engine to be debuted in an all new car. Very often a new car comes with an older proven engine, and new engines debut in mid-model cars. Weren't the Modular V-8's introduced in mid-model Mustangs. There's a lot less risk that way. The new F150 will hopefully get it's 6.2L V-8 mid model. The 6.0 PSD was introduced mid-model. Even the Hemi was not an original option on the latest Ram design. Give them some time. GM's hung on to their older engine designs for quite a while. The 3.8 in the Impala's and Grand Prix's aren't that much quicker than a 3.0 equipped 500.
Also, the 500 prices very competitively. The only way to get an SEL up to $27,795 is to make it AWD. 22,795 gets you into an already nicely equipped FWD SE. Teh only thing better is a Camry.

Cheapest you can get into V-6:
Honda Accord $23,950
Nissan Altima $23,250
Toyota Camry LE 3.0 $22,530
Toyota Camry SE 3.3 $23,775
Chevy Impala 3.4 $23,010
Chevy Impala 3.8 $26,120
Chrysler 300 2.7 $23,995
Chrysler 300 Touring 3.5 $27,895
No. You have to start piling on the options to get it's price up to the average of the rest of them.

 

.................

 

According to AMCI-certified testing, the CVT uses that 203 hosepower very efficiently. In 0-60 and merging/passing tests, the 500 out-accelerated the Camry XLE V6, Chevy Impala LS, Chrysler 300 Touring, and the Toyota Avalon XLS. 0-60 for the 500 was 7.45 sec, Camry 7.79, Impala 7.99, 300 Touring 8.00 and Avalon 8.61.

We can squabble about horsepower numbers all we want; it's the numbers on the board at the end of the quarter-mile that count.

 

Hello all, my name is Frank Giovinazzi, I'm the editor of Car Buyer's Notebook, the guy who wrote the 500 article, and am writing to say thanks for the link.

Also, your discussion of the horsepower question is giving me a lot of the data I need to compile a knowledgeable review. I am waiting my turn to get into the 500.

A big problem with auto journalists is the same you have when a waiter gets to eat filet mignon every day -- flank steak is dirt! In my own experience, I had a heck of a lot of fun driving the VW Touareg V-10 TDI. A couple weeks later I got a sub-$20,000 SUV which shall remain nameless.

Of course it had less power -- the Touareg costs $65k! It's the apples and oranges problem. A good reviewer will write from the point of view of the median potential buyer, not from their own spoiled perspective.

 

Welcome to FTE Frank

It's good to read about how the car reporting business really works.
Keep up the good work.

 

First Welcome to the board Frank

Second I have heard a lot about merging into traffic with this car and 0-60 times. Very seldom are 0-60 times revelant when merging. Most of the time when I am merging on the freeway/interstate I am doing at least 20 at the start of the on-ramp. I know some onramps in CA have lights on them and most of them are on freeways with a 55mph speed limit on them plus they give you room to get up to speed. I am sorry but sitting at the top of an onramp and suddenly accelerating to 60 is stupid.

 

i agree, but the fine folks in Pittsburgh have not figured out how to merge and usually come to a stop before they go. I have passed a number of people stopped in the merge lane.

Yes, arguing numbers is stupid and last night me and the wife went to the local Ford dealer to drive a new 500. We like everything except the power. It feels slow and is slow. I think the comfort/size/price will win out over the altima's performance, but it is very disappointing to like a car soo much and yet be completely bored while driving it. I drive a lot and need to like what I am driving, it's not completely all about safety and comfort(although they are very high on the list). I am a garhead and like speed, even in my family cars. My old 92 taurus sho was one of my favorite cars because it had everything. I just wish ford gave the 500 50 more hp to compete with the others in the class and they would sell a lot more than they are now. IMO

I will probably get the 500, but I will be looking for any performance mods i can find. I wonder if the nitrous kit from my old sho would bolt up

 

I have to agree with MarkII about horsepower numbers, I have heard that many car companies take some artistic license in reporting horsepower, 0-60 and torque. The magazine comparisons are nice because it should be an unbiased test. If you don't take what they say for gospel do your own test drives.

I am currently not in the market for a new car so I haven't driven any of these cars, but I like the look of the 500 and the fact it has optional AWD. No wonder I thought it looked like an Audi. It is odd that they don't offer another engine option, but I have heard talk that another one is on its way.

When my Taurus needs to be retired my next car may well be the 500 or its wagon version the Freestyle.

 

Thanks for the welcome. When it comes to real-world acceleration, I remember having a Datsun B-210 wagon that I used to think of as the deathmobile -- it couldn't get into traffic without it treating me to a big scary grill in my rear view.

Hence, one of my biggest biases in car reviewing is this feature. If I get a car that can't get onto Virginia's 495 I will curse it the rest of my days. However, if it can, I will praise it -- and if you read my reviews you'll see I'm consistent on covering that attribute.

Now for something a little controversial. I am curious to hear from Ford truck folks about the plight of the Ranger. It seems to this new auto writer that Ford has abandoned this product in the cold. I have written a tough article on this issue, titled:

Crystal Ball Prediction: Toyota Tacoma will be the best-selling small pickup in 2005

ADMIN NOTE: LINKS FOR NEWBIES ARE DISALLOWED FOR EXACTLY THE REASON YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO POST THEM. Link removed.
<!-- Note: link to my site, CarBuyersNotebook[dot]com, DOES NOT follow, as I am unable to post URLs yet. If someone could do me the favor, I'd appreciate it. -->

And FYI -- I was wrong in January! The Colorado actually took the top spot, Tacoma #2, Ranger #3! Sales figures below. But I'm not such a punk I'll go back and edit an error of that category. I still thnk the Tacoma's going to win in '05 anyway.

So as not to violate forum rules, I am posting this here. If any moderators or other members want to start a new thread, I would follow that discussion there. Again, I'm looking for feedback, not flames!


<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="93" width="340"> <col style="width: 194pt;" width="259"> <col style="width: 61pt;" width="81"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15.75pt;" height="21"> <td class="xl32" style="height: 15.75pt; width: 194pt;" x:str="'Chevrolet Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " height="21" width="259">Chevrolet Colorado . . . . .
</td> <td class="xl31" style="width: 61pt;" x:num="10176" align="right" width="81">10,176 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15.75pt;" height="21"> <td class="xl32" style="height: 15.75pt;" x:str="'Toyota Tacoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." height="21">Toyota Tacoma . . . . . . .
</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="9435" align="right">9,435 </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15.75pt;" height="21"> <td class="xl32" style="height: 15.75pt;" x:str="'Ford Ranger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." height="21">Ford Ranger. . . . . . . . . </td> <td class="xl31" x:num="7634" align="right">7,634 </td> </tr></tbody> </table>

 

I think we have lost sight of what the 500 has replaced. It is exponentially better then the taurus it replaces. The 500 is not slow and unless you like to drag race family cars, you won't be disapointed. Two hundred hp is nothing to shake a stick at. My 96' windstar hauls with 200hp 220lbft and its a 4000lbs van. I doubt that anyone will have to floor the 500 with any regularity to get it to go. With that said, to expect Ford to come out and upset the accord or the camry is absurd. You cannot compare japanese cars and american cars, they are inherently different. The 500 by itself destroys any other American family sedan, especially the Malibu, Grand Am and Monte Carlo when it comes to value, build quality, interior space and reliability. Most Grand Ams I know get a new transmission with every oil change! So what if they have more power. If Ford wanted to put as much power into their cars as possible, they could have. Power isn't everything.